DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY 

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 
Application for the Correction of 
the Coast Guard Record of: 
 
                                                                                BCMR Docket No. 2008-096 
 
XXXXXXXXXXXX 
XXXXXXXXXXXX 
   

 

 
 

FINAL DECISION 

 
 
This proceeding was conducted according to the provisions of section 1552 of title 10 and 
section 425 of title 14 of the United States Code.  The Chair docketed the application on March 
21,  2008,  upon  receipt  of  the  applicant’s  completed  application  and  military  records,  and 
subsequently prepared the final decision as required by 33 C.F.R. § 52.61(c). 
 
 
appointed members who were designated to serve as the Board in this case. 
 

This final decision, dated December 17, 2008, is approved and signed by the three duly 

APPLICANT’S REQUEST AND ALLEGATIONS 

 
 
The  applicant  asked  the  Board  to  correct  his  record  in  accordance  with  ALCOAST 
118/061 to restore the 18 days of leave that he was not allowed to carry forward into fiscal year 
                                                 
1   ALCOAST 118/06 announced a special leave accrual (SLA) policy as a result of Hurricanes Katrina or Rita.  It 
provided for the following: 

2.    All  Coast  Guard  military  personnel  who  either  directly  participated  in  or  directly  supported 
hurricane disaster relief operations for hurricanes Katrina or Rita Between 29 Aug 05 and 30 Sep 
05, regardless of location are authorized to carry over leave in excess of 60 days but not more than 
120  days  accumulated.    To  qualify  for  SLA,  the  member  must  have  been  on  active  duty  for  a 
continuous period of 30 days, and must have actually been prevented from taking leave during the 
period which would have other wise reduced his or her leave balance to 60 days or less prior to the 
end of FY05.   

5.    Leave  in  excess  of  60  days  restored  under  this  provision  shall  be  lost  unless  used  before 
01OCT08. 

  * 

 

* 

 

* 

  * 

 

* 

 

* 

7.  All requests for SLA must be submitted IAW the Personnel Pay and Procedures Manual by the 
command in time to arrive to PSC no later than 03Apr06.  This is a firm deadline that cannot be 
extended due to database automation constraints.  Requests received by PSC after this date will 
not be considered.  This request must be sent through the appropriate chain of command to the 
area commanders who are the approving authorities and will forward approved requests to PSC 
(mas).  Given the relatively short timeframe for request submission, units may send their list via 

2005.   He further requested correction of his record to show that he sold the 18 days of leave 
back to the government at the time of his retirement on June 30, 2006.   
 
 
The applicant alleged that due to an oversight his command failed to include his name on 
its list of members entitled to SLA.  He believed this oversight occurred because he had departed 
on terminal leave prior to the command’s compilation and submission of the list.  The applicant 
stated that during the processing of his DD Form 214 he asked the YN about SLA and was told 
that there was no process in place at that time.  According to the applicant, the YN believed that 
the unit would compile and submit a list of those eligible for SLA.  He stated he retired believing 
that  his  name  would  be  included  on  the  list  for  SLA  because  he  met  the  requirements  of  the 
ALCOAST.   
 
 
The applicant stated that the Coast Guard denied his 2008 request to have the 18 days of 
leave  restored,  even  though  he  qualified  for  SLA.    The  applicant  argued  that  the ALCOAST 
placed responsibility on  the command for  compilation and submission of SLA requests to the 
appropriate Coast Guard office.   
 
 
The applicant submitted an email string that shows on January 15, 2008, he asked to have 
the  18  days  of  leave  restored  under  ALCOAST  118/06.    On  March  4,  2008,  the  applicant’s 
request was denied because it was not submitted by April 3, 2006, as required by the ALCOAST.  
In a subsequent email dated March 4, 2008, a LCDR in the Office of Military Personnel told the 
applicant that it was ultimately his responsibility to inform the command of his eligibility under 
the ALCOAST.   
 
 
The  applicant  claimed  that  he  discovered  the  error  on  May  1,  2005.    He  stated  that 
because he was busy with finding employment, beginning a new job, and moving, he lost track 
of the issue until he received his final DD Form 214.  It is not possible to tell from the DD Form 
214 the date on which it was received by the applicant.   
 

VIEWS OF THE COAST GUARD 

 
 
On August 12, 2008, the Judge Advocate General (JAG) of the Coast Guard submitted a 
memorandum  in  which  he  adopted  the  comments  provided  by  Commander,  Coast  Guard 
Personnel Command (CGPC), as the Coast Guard’s advisory opinion.   CGPC recommended that 
the Board grant the following relief: 
 

a. The applicant’s record be corrected to reflect that he did not lose 18 days of 
leave on October 1, 2005 (end of FY 2005). 
 

                                                                                                                                                             

message or email . . . Consolidated roster of eligible personnel, rather than individual requests, are 
most strongly encouraged.   

 
 
 
 

b. The applicant’s record . . . be corrected to reflect that he sold 18.5 days vice .5 
days  of  accrued  leave  in  conjunction  with  his  July  1,  2006  retirement.    The 
member should be paid any amount due as a result of this correction. 
 
c .The applicant should be issued a correction to his DD Form 214 . . .  correcting 
block 16 from 0.5 to 18.5 days accrued leave paid.   

 
CGPC determined that from September 12, 2005, through October 4, 2005, the applicant 
 
was assigned TAD to Mobile, AL in support of hurricane Katrina relief.  On February 28, 2006, 
ALCOAST  118/06  announced  the  policy  for  SLA  as  a  result  of  hurricanes  Katrina  and  Rita.  
April 3, 2006 was the deadline for submitting requests for SLA.  On April 10, 2006, the applicant 
commenced 82 days of leave in conjunction with his retirement orders.  On January 15, 2008, the 
applicant requested authorization from Headquarters Division CG-1221 to be credited with 18 
days of SLA.  His then-request was denied.  
 

In  recommending  relief  in  the  current  case,  CGPC  reached  the  following  pertinent 

 

CGPC stated that Chapter 5.D. of the Coast Guard Pay and Personnel Procedures Manual 
specifies  the  procedures  for  carrying  over  leave.    The  instruction  requires  a  unit  to  submit  a 
consolidated memo or message to PSC for carry over leave, instead of individual requests.   

conclusions:  
 

The applicant does not present a persuasive argument in his belief that the matter 
was being taken care of by his unit yeoman.  Since the submission date required 
by  the ALCOAST  was  prior  to  the  applicant’s  departure  on  terminal  leave,  the 
applicant should have followed up to ensure that his name was properly included 
in  the  roster  of  individuals  eligible  for  SLA.    However,  per  the  Pay  and 
Procedures  Manual,  group  submission  is  preferred  (though  not  explicitly 
required).  Other than individual SLA requests there is no specific requirement of 
form  or  format  for  members  to  request  their  names  be  included  in  the 
consolidated unit roster.  The applicant presents  that he in good faith requested 
inclusion [of his name] through his unit administrative staff.  There is nothing in 
the  applicant’s  record  to  counteract  his  claim  of  this  request,  and  given  the 
applicant’s 25 plus years of service, [his] assertion is not disputed.   
 
In BCMR 2008-063, the applicant was granted [an] administrative remedy by the 
Coast Guard for nearly identical circumstances.  In 2008-063, the applicant was 
under permanent change of station orders and transferred prior to the release of 
ALCOAST 118/06.  [That] applicant had inquired into SLA prior to the issuance 
of [the ALCOAST] and presumed that his name would be included with the roster 
of those eligible for SLA.  The Coast Guard approved SLA in April 2008, well 
past  the  deadline  established  in  ALCOAST  1118/06.    Failure  to  meet  the 
submission deadline is the presumptive reason for denial of the applicant’s request 
and based upon the findings of 2008-063, there is precedent for the Coast Guard 
waiving  this  standard  when  through  no  fault  of  the  applicant’s  their  name  was 
erroneously left off of the unit roster for SLA under ALCOAST 118/06.     

APPLICANT’S RESPONSE TO THE VIEWS OF THE COAST GUARD 

In August 2008, the Board received a letter from the applicant in which he agreed with 

 
 
the advisory opinion.   
 

FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS 

The Board makes the following findings and conclusions on the basis of the applicant's 

 
 
military record and submissions, the Coast Guard's submissions, and applicable law: 
 

1.  The Board has jurisdiction concerning this matter pursuant to section 1552 of title 10 

of the United States Code.  The application was timely.    
 
2.  The JAG recommends, and the  Board agrees, that the applicant’s  record should be 
 
corrected to show that he did not lose 18 days of accrued leave on October 1, 2005 because he 
was eligible to carry over in excess of 60 days of accrued leave under the SLA policy announced 
under ALCOAST 118/06.  His record should also be corrected to show that he sold the 18 days 
of leave back to the government upon his retirement.  In this regard, the Board agrees with the 
JAG that the applicant’s unit committed an error by not including his name on the list it compiled 
and  submitted  of  those  members  who  were  entitled  to  SLA  under  ALCOAST  118/06.    The 
applicant stated that he inquired about SLA prior to his retirement and was told by the yeoman 
that the command would probably compile a list of those eligible for SLA.   The applicant stated 
that  he  believed  his  name  would  be  included  on  that  list.    The  JAG  determined  that  the 
applicant’s  statement  is  credible  based  upon  his  twenty-five  years  of  honorable  service  to  the 
Coast Guard and the absence of any evidence in the record to refute his contention. The Board 
agrees that the applicant’s explanation is reasonable and credible.   
 
 
3.  Further, the applicant’s case is similar to that in Docket No. 2008-063 where the Coast 
Guard administratively restored 5 days of leave to an applicant under ALCOAST 118-06 in May 
2008.  The applicant in Docket No. 2008-063 presumed that his name would be included on the 
unit’s  list  after  he  departed  the  command  on  permanent  change  of  station  orders.  The  Coast 
Guard waived the deadline requirement in the ALCOAST and paid that applicant.  Therefore, 
failure to comply with the submission deadline in the ALCOAST should not bar relief under the 
circumstances of this case.   
  
 
advisory opinion.  
 

4.  Accordingly, the applicant’s request for relief should be granted in accordance with the 

 

 

[ORDER AND SIGNATURES APPEAR ON FOLLOWING PAGE] 

 
 

ORDER 

 

The application of XXXXXXXXXX, USCG, Retired, for correction of his military record 
is  granted.    His  record  shall  be  corrected  to  show  that  he  did  not  lose  18  days  of  leave  on 
September 30, 2005, but that the 18 days were brought forward into fiscal year 2006.  His record 
shall be further corrected to show that he sold the 18 days SLA upon his retirement on July 1, 
2006.  The Coast Guard shall pay him the amount due as a result of this correction. 
 

The Coast Guard shall correct block 16 of his DD Form 214 to show that he was paid for 

 

 
 Vicki J. Ray 

 

 

 
 George A. Weller 

 

 

 

 

 

 
 
 Janice Williams-Jones 
  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

18.5 days of accrued leave, instead of 0.5.